Reply #18: Oh, yes. Very much so. Most liberal arts colleges offer courses in

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

political psychology and many of my students who want to understand the political mind find themselves drawn to this discipline. I have also been quite interested in the psychological impact that the M$M has on public opinion. What sparked my interest was how Gore was treated during the presidential election when he ran against Bush in 2000. The first debate was particularly telling. Gore won that debate hands down. Intial opinion polls showed that most Americans believed that Bush was no contest and that Gore demonstreated a strong command of the issues. However, the punditry (unfriendly to Clinton/Gore), complained that Gore keep sighing, rolling his eyes, shifting his weight, and came off as haughty and "cerebral."

Opinion polls taken a week later demonstrated that most Americans had changed their views and that Bush actually won the debate. According to the surveys, the voters felt that Bush was "one of them," a person "you could have a beer with." Gore was the elitist, too self-righteous and not folksy enough. And that's the narrative that the Republicans, with the aid of the M$M, have been able to use to defeat Democrats for years now. Dems are flip-floppers. They are "latte liberals" who will raise your taxes for social welfare programs that benefit those who don't work. They are "baby-killers" and "Nazi appeasers."

How in the world did the Democratic party, liberals, and good progressives allow the Repukes to have such mind control over voters? Even to the extent that most Democrats run away from the "liberal" label? How in the world did we allow them to manipulate language to give their side the winning advantage? While we mistakingly believe that we can win on the issues, the Repugs know how to win by exploiting people's inherent racist tendencies, fears, etc. They've been doing so successfully every since the Dixiecrats in the South became Republicans because they were opposed to civil rights legislation and court decisions. The courts became a haven for "activist judges," and we continue to allow them to get away with this abusive language to our detriment.

Like Frank Luntz, the Democrats should have their own pollsters who conduct focus groups, testing out effective use of words and language, slogans that work. Democrats should be testing ads and slogans that define who the Democrats are. The one advantage that the Repukes have is that because they have such party discipline, they are able to speak as one and stay on a unified message that they repeat over and over again. As we have seen with the Democrats most recently during the primaries, getting us to unify fully behind a candidate or a cohesive message is like pulling teeth! It's so frustrating!!